The Court of Appeal has refused a developer permission to appeal against a ruling in a closely watched right-to-light case, leaving major question marks in a contentious area, a lawyer has warned.
Last year, the High Court gave judgment in Beaumont Business Centres Ltd v Florala Properties Ltd [2020] EWHC 550 (Ch); [2020] PLSCS 45, a dispute arising out of Florala’s decision to increase the height of its building on Moorgate and London Wall by 11.25m, affecting the light in Beaumont’s building.
Finding in favour of Beaumont, the court ruled it was entitled to an injunction preventing an interference with its right to light. However, as Florala’s tenant had not yet had an opportunity to be heard in the action, it found that Florala would be liable to pay Beaumont damages instead, in the sum of £350,000.
Now the Court of Appeal has declined to hear Florala’s appeal in the matter.
James Souter, partner at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys, said: “Despite predictions that this case would go all the way and provide much-needed clarity around rights of light and the vexed question of when an injunction should be granted, Beaumont v Florala has been refused permission to appeal. This leaves considerable uncertainty in the law around rights of light.
Souter added: “The High Court decision signalled a significant shift in the approach of the courts to rights-of-light cases and served as a stark reminder to developers that courts can and will grant injunctions requiring part of an already completed and occupied building to be torn down.
“It was hoped by many that the Court of Appeal would take the opportunity to review the law in this area and provide much-needed guidance for developers. However, unless the court can be persuaded to reconsider their refusal of permission at an oral hearing, which is unlikely, we are left waiting for another case to provide that guidance.”
To send feedback, e-mail jess.harrold@egi.co.uk or tweet @estatesgazette
